The idea of this method was to introduce heavy air agitation for more efficient extraction in a closed environment that maintains the intrabrew temperature. That results in a fuller body, rich, much sweeter and much stronger nasal-flavored coffee. In many ways, it is similar to Trifecta that utilizes heavy air agitation in a closed chamber and you may have seen it in the Bunn Trifecta MB thread before.

What you need is your normal dose of coffee ground to French Press size(Lido works fanstatic). Pour the freshly ground beans into a clean preheated Mason Jar(that you use to store-freeze coffee). Adds hot water (200-205F) to your normal brew parameter/ratio. Now here's the THING. Seal it with lid and SHAKE it rigorously(with a rag to protect your hand from burning) in the 0,1,2 minute interval.

At the 3:00 minute, pour the coffee with slur into a Aeropress on top of your favorite mug. Press away and try the resultant.

The coffee will look more brown-ish as compared to your normal brew(similar to Trifecta). But what you get in return, is the first(and subsequent) sip, you will get surprise by very strong flavors echoed in your nasal. Presumeably, the agitation may have incorporated some air and the aroma that is normally released into the environment, now trapped in your coffee. For some reason, the brew is also very sweet compared to all other brew methods. The sharpness from some high acidity coffee may also be reduced slightly to become a more balanced cup.

Anyhow, just give it a try and share what you think here.

Thanks for tomorrow morning's coffee preparation plan!

Yes! I need to try this out.

I'd like to say you are imagining this. However, after trying it, I too would have to be imagining it.

Compared to my standard Tim Wendelboe method, this brew was far more aromatic, more sweetness focused, and had reduced brightness.

The pressing was harder and the resulting brew more cloudy than normal. There's an unpleasant tongue coating similar to French Press and metal filtered coffee that is not for me.

I used to use a mason jar shake method with the V-60 years back before finally buying a kettle. It would always clog the filter, too.

Damn--my jars are too small to give it a try. Soon, soon.

Btw, I *thought* this sounded familiar! Here's an earlier report from Sam: http://www.roaste.com/CoffeeBlogs/samue ... ench-Shake

Shake on, man.

You could brew with the aeropress inverted and while carefully holding it shake the whole thing during the brew, i've done this and works, but it's always very fiddly and frankly, a bit scary, so the mason jar makes sense, also the aeropress loses quite a bit of temperature during prolonged brews, an alternative to improve temperature stability could be an insulated vacuum travel mug, but might be a bit overkill.

What concerns me a bit with this method is the last stage when transferring the slur into the aeropress at 3min, this step could introduce considerable additional turbulence when the grounds are most sensible to release unwanted bitterness. Also the aeropress plunging works without much effort when the grounds have settled in the bottom for a bit, so an improvement over this method could be to transfer the slurry right after the 2min shake (or maybe 2:30) to a preheated aeropress, wait until timer reads 3 then press the plunger.

I've also read of some people trying to replicate the Trifecta turbulence with one of those battery operated milk frothers (Aerolatte), i once tried it when brewing with a french press and worked pretty well creating a vortex and stirring the slur very efficiently, but didn't pay much attention to how it affected taste in the cup, suspended fines due to the french press filter might have obscured the subtleness in flavors a bit too much, so transferring to an aeropress should definitely work better. I need to give this a try!

endlesscycles wrote:I'd like to say you are imagining this. However, after trying it, I too would have to be imagining it.

Hah!

endlesscycles wrote:Compared to my standard Tim Wendelboe method, this brew was far more aromatic, more sweetness focused, and had reduced brightness.

The pressing was harder and the resulting brew more cloudy than normal. There's an unpleasant tongue coating similar to French Press and metal filtered coffee that is not for me.

Exactly! More aromatic, sweetness that it's almost unbelievable..though I hadn't realize about the coating on tongue. Maybe it's the oil? Logically,agitation will also mix the hot liquidified oil into the water phase that can get through the filtering.


The reduced brightness means that it may not be optimal for some delicate coffees(or some drinker for that matter). But it will work well enough for most that like medium acidity with sweet, rich body(I am sucker for this). This method may not be for everyone, but I think the resultant brew is quite different that it warrants a bit more attention.

jbviau wrote:Damn--my jars are too small to give it a try. Soon, soon.

Btw, I *thought* this sounded familiar! Here's an earlier report from Sam: http://www.roaste.com/CoffeeBlogs/samue ... ench-Shake

Shake on, man.

Man, you've got good memory! One downside from using French Press is that the excessive 'body' that got through the screen, thus may be giving a too gritty texture for some sensitive palates. Aeropress with the paper filter seems to 'clean' it sufficiently.

And previously I am not confident that my tongue is tasting the difference. Now I've drank enough coffee to do so.

oktyone wrote:What concerns me a bit with this method is the last stage when transferring the slur into the aeropress at 3min, this step could introduce considerable additional turbulence when the grounds are most sensible to release unwanted bitterness. Also the aeropress plunging works without much effort when the grounds have settled in the bottom for a bit, so an improvement over this method could be to transfer the slurry right after the 2min shake (or maybe 2:30) to a preheated aeropress, wait until timer reads 3 then press the plunger.

I myself are not too worry about the additional turbulence from transfer. Compared to how I shake the Mason jar, those turbulence seems like nothing in comparison. Plus, most of the ground have already sinked at the time of pouring. But your method is definitely useful to ease the press. Will give that a try.

Some of what you describe is not unlike what I've encountered by blending coffee beans with hot (or cold) water.

https://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee...146#586146

I've since done the shake with cold brew and hot brew MJA techniques (Mason Jar AeroPress).

Here's a surprising thing to try - do this with an espresso grind. You'll be shocked at the aroma.

Compare a LIDO-2.0 to LIDO-0.5 and LIDO-0.0 (right at the brass washer).

When using the AeroPress for pressing it out, get as much of the grounds into the press verted, (that's NON-inverted) for the first half of the press, wait 30 seconds for the grounds to settle to the bottom against the filter. You can also put the plunger in just to seal the AeroPress to prevent leak through and toss anything that does leak through back into the remaining slurry (be careful if you do this).

After 30 seconds, press gently - take your time. You're using the coffee grounds as a cake filter, the more gentle the more clarified your brew will be.

I find the wide-mouth jars work better - easier to keep stirring to get the grounds in the slurry into the press.

If you just pour off (decant) the coffee through any filter (even paper ones) without the grounds, you'll end up with cloudy tan coffee.

I'll typically heat up 500ml to boiling, ends up being around 425g effective water (evaporation, etc.) and about 25g coffee. I press it through in two shots.

If you go with 270g water, by the time you boil it, and add ~15g coffee, you'll be able to press this out in one shot, but you have less grounds to act as a cake-filter and the result is cloudier. Conversely, you could go with a stronger brew ratio (more coffee). I find nice filtration with about 25g of coffee.

oktyone wrote:...
What concerns me a bit with this method is the last stage when transferring the slur into the aeropress at 3min, this step could introduce considerable additional turbulence when the grounds are most sensible to release unwanted bitterness. Also the aeropress plunging works without much effort when the grounds have settled in the bottom for a bit, so an improvement over this method could be to transfer the slurry right after the 2min shake (or maybe 2:30) to a preheated aeropress, wait until timer reads 3 then press the plunger....

okytone - for most grinds, the strength is reaching equilibrium in 3-4 minutes, and agitation isn't really going to change this much, if at all. Fine grinds reach equilibrium strength in about 10-30 seconds.

I find the bitterness comes from temperature more than grind or turbulence. There seems to be a sharp increase in bitterness as the strike temperature goes from 204°F to 205°F to 206°F... temperature and the presence of fines. More fines in contact with water over 205°F means increased bitterness.


Here's yet another thing to try that may surprise you.

Take 25g coffee ground LIDO-1.5, add to room temperature mason jar.
Add 425g water at 200°F. (be prepared - some people claim the jar may shatter due to thermal shock, in the hundreds of times I've done this it has never happened, but I remain prepared for the possibility)

Seal with the mason jar lid immediately.

Shake well for 30 seconds.

Shake well at 1:30 for 30 seconds.

Shake well at 1-2 minute intervals for the next 10 minutes.

Leave the jar on the counter (or in the fridge, your preference) for at least 4 hours and up to 48 hours. If you want to shake during this time, go ahead. Probably won't make a difference.

When it's time to extract, remove the ring, unseal and heat the slurry to about 140°F (for this amount of coffee in a 1200W microwave, this is about 1 to 1 1/2 minutes at full power). Re-seal and shake. Then, press it out (takes two pours, so stir well and pour while stirring to get as much of the grounds into the AeroPress as you can on the first pour), allow to settle and press gently and slowly.

Guats respond well to this - the florals will bloom upon reheating and end up in the cup. Fruity coffees also respond very well - traditional blackberries, black currants, blueberries pop in the Ethiopians. Oranges/Citrusy fruits in the Tanzanians/Kenyans. Deep earthy character with woody elements and caramel/chocolates with spicy notes in the Indonesians (like Mandheling).

You can also press these cold, but the aromatics won't pop well until heated, AND some of the aromatics and oils and even body can remain stuck in the grounds (as well as the yield will be lower - the grounds will weigh more if pressed cold vs. if pressed hotter, meaning less yield if pressed cold).

Buttercup wrote:Some of what you describe is not unlike what I've encountered by blending coffee beans with hot (or cold) water.

https://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffe ... 146#586146

I've since done the shake with cold brew and hot brew MJA techniques (Mason Jar AeroPress).

Here's a surprising thing to try - do this with an espresso grind. You'll be shocked at the aroma.

Compare a LIDO-2.0 to LIDO-0.5 and LIDO-0.0 (right at the brass washer).

When using the AeroPress for pressing it out, get as much of the grounds into the press verted, (that's NON-inverted) for the first half of the press, wait 30 seconds for the grounds to settle to the bottom against the filter. You can also put the plunger in just to seal the AeroPress to prevent leak through and toss anything that does leak through back into the remaining slurry (be careful if you do this).

After 30 seconds, press gently - take your time. You're using the coffee grounds as a cake filter, the more gentle the more clarified your brew will be.

I find the wide-mouth jars work better - easier to keep stirring to get the grounds in the slurry into the press.

If you just pour off (decant) the coffee through any filter (even paper ones) without the grounds, you'll end up with cloudy tan coffee.

.

Steve,

This is genius! I have been thinking any way to make the cup less cloudy and it would be more than perfect. And I think you've got the solution here. Can't wait to try it. Too bad it's night now.

And that's a well of knowledge you posted there. I will digest it bit by bit if weren't for the due date I've got to catch. Don't worry, I will read them again tomorrow.